From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Wed Dec 20 16:06:32 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48F0BE92042 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 16:06:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portmaster@BSDforge.com) Received: from udns.ultimatedns.net (static-24-113-41-81.wavecable.com [24.113.41.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DAA0751E4 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 16:06:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portmaster@BSDforge.com) Received: from udns.ultimatedns.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by udns.ultimatedns.net (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id vBKG8PoK064149; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:08:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from portmaster@BSDforge.com) X-Mailer: UDNSMS MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: In-Reply-To: From: "Chris H" Reply-To: portmaster@BSDforge.com To: "Johannes Lundberg" Subject: Re: Vote: making wayland=on default Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:08:31 -0800 Message-Id: <0bc4b9b1d25db922415413bfa84375d7@udns.ultimatedns.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 16:06:32 -0000 On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 09:20:20 +0000 "Johannes Lundberg" = said > Hi >=20 > I want to suggest that we enable wayland by default=2E In current state > having some parts of wayland in ports is basically useless the > end-users themselves re-build gtk30 and mesa-libs with wayland > enabled=2E >=20 > libwayland-egl=2Eso from mesa-libs and the extra libraries and headers > from gtk30 adds like a few KB, a drop in the ocean compared to xorg > packages=2E (might be something more that I missed) >=20 > Personally I see no reason not to make it default on, even with > flavors coming up=2E For any Desktop user (as well as embedded devices > like IVI-systems and whatnot), Wayland is the future=2E There's no > escaping that=2E >=20 > Wayland has been quite usable on FreeBSD for over a year now but > access to it is limited due to the extra efforts required to use it=2E >=20 > If we are to compare with the other guys, several Linux distros are > already switching to wayland-based compositors as default window > server=2E >=20 > What do you think? IMHO it's (still) too early=2E Too much other X(org) related work still being completed=2E In fact, I just built a new dev box to track 12 (CURRENT), and this was the first time I was not required to pre generate a config file for Xorg=2E I was only required to inform /usr/local/etc/X11/xorg=2Econf=2Ed/nvidia-driver=2Econf that the driver was "nvidia", not "nv"=2E Everything work(s|ed) famously=2E A real treat=2E I'm also a bit concerned about the progress (or lack there of) on network transparency=2E I (personally) could conceive it as a KERNEL OPTION, but would not want to see it in the Default kernel=2E Well, those are *my* thoughts=2E Because you asked=2E :-) --Chris >=20 >=20 > /Johannes